FISAfest

[solarbird]

First off, Jane at Firedoglake has put up a Senatorial public appearance locator. The goal is to find your Senator, if they're going to be around over the holiday, and dunn them over FISA. I suggest clicking and seeing if you have an event in range. (I don't.) Go for it.

Meanwhile, there's lots of commentary flying around on the FISA disaster. The American Conservative is on our side, asking if the 4th Amendment and law-bound executive isn't worth defending, then what the hell is, and why are only "left-liberals" concerned:

It seems to me that there have to be some things that are not negotiable and things that should not be compromised for electoral expediency. You might think constitutional protections would be among those things, and that this would not be the concern of left-liberals alone. Apparently, you would be wrong.

Eschaton asks the same question - why the hell is this supposedly a "left-liberal" question, and Daniel Larison wants to know why "the idea that defending the Fourth Amendment against egregious, systematic violation by the government is some far-out extremist position that must be watered down or abandoned in order to appeal to 'the middle.'" Digby at Hullabaloo explains things to the American Conservative in a post worth reading. Highlighting key aspects of Digby's commentary, The New Republic tells FISA protesters, "HEY NUTROOTS - YOU LOST," calling protests in favour of the 4th Amendment "hissy-fits," and adding, "By rejecting these people and their radicalism, Barack Obama isn't just showing that he wants to win, but that he wants to govern the country responsibly." That "radicalism" to which they refer is the Constitution and rule of law - you know, things only losers care about, not Real Americans.

Glenn Greenwald has a couple of important articles, one on a third ruling against Mr. Bush's illegal surveillance programme, which will likewise be mooted if this legislation passes as is expected. Senator Obama has issued a new statement on his FISA reversal, which Mr. Greenwald takes apart here, comparing and contrasting it to facts and previous statements. And Obama supporters protesting this move now form the largest self-organised interest group on Senator Obama's campaign website.

Comments

[denelian.livejournal.com]

i am not arguing, i just have this nagging question;
all of the articles i read about the FISA always say something that equals "Bush and Cheney are trying to pass this because they want more POWER"
????
neither one will have access to that power after january... ya know? WHY are they working so hard to instill a power they won't really get to use? that makes no sense to me...
maybe because i have trouble actually believing that Republicans actually can trust each other enough to share the power...

[solarbird]

Okay, so.

Retroactive amnesty is to keep their illegal domestic spying activities secret; it's a bipartisan cover-up of the matter, combined with a sell-out to the telecom companies involved to keep them out of trouble. It's also to validate the concept of executive rule by decree - the concept that if the Chief Executive orders something, that makes it legal - which is very important to the authoritarians. This concept is intrinsically important to any authoritarian, regardless of who is actually in power.

More generally, there is an apparent consensus in the political class that this is what that class wants. This class spans the parties, and therefore, the class will get it. It's not about an individual ruler having this power - the only individual interests are bribery/corporate protection and cover-up of illegal activity.

[denelian.livejournal.com]

the amnesty always made perfect sense (whice is why i was against it)
it was the built-in power. with the VERY high chance of a den takin POTUS, why would Bush/Cheney share? this sorta makes sense... i will think on it more. tanx!

[solarbird]

You think of them as two warring, polar opposite parties. They aren't. They do have very real conflicts about some issues, many of which are important to some of us. But they are both part of and representatives of a political class that is in total agreement on many other issues. Remember that, and these behaviours make sense.